That Ignatieff guy.
Today, in the National Post (sub. req.), Michael Ignatieff writes a really whiny guest column. Part of it is about how the "all-wise, all-knowing" media is being so mean to the Liberals: "[They] have repeatedly attacked the Martin record, while allowing the Harper record to escape the serious scutiny it merits."
This is the very same media, of course, that Conservatives regularly complained was not giving the Liberals enough scrutiny when their party was losing... But that's okay, Ignatieff is certainly entitled to shoot the messenger if he wants. It's a time-honoured tradition in politics and nobody likes the press anyway.
But later in his column, I stumbled across this passage and the Cheerio bits went flying: "It's easy going door to door with this record of social justice and sound financial management. Today's media is hard on the Martin record. Historians of the future will judge it the way they now judge the Pearson record, as a story of social progress achieved in the face of the perils and difficulties of minority government."
How dare he profane the name of Lester B.! The man who brought in the very Canadian flag that Paul Martin took down from his CSL ships!
(Cheap, I know, but we're talking about Pearson, here, the man who should've won Greatest Canadian...)
I like how Ignatieff doesn't even couch his prediction with a "probably" or "likely." I have a few ideas about how historians of the future with judge Paul Martin's record -- probably along with names like Tupper and Meighen and Clark and Campbell -- but I'll leave that to them or go back and go get an MA in history.
By the way, Blood and Belonging. Fine book.